Just another WordPress.com site

Archive for February, 2011

Companies either are successful or unsuccessful. This will depend on the management strategy, which should be particularized to nature of each enterprise. There are enormous experiences in which prosperous businesses felt down because they had neither the capacity nor will for sustaining their growing by which managers become them in ephemeral successful organizations. Meanwhile, other organizations are flourishing because they pay attention and act focused on a variety of issues, such as human resources, training, work environment as well as research and development. These two scenarios: negative and positive management were able to be seen through Nordstrom and SAS organizations.

In fact, a company should sustainably maintain its growing and development over time. This is, of course, a difficult task but not impossible. The responsibility is, first of all, on manager, and secondly, on employees. For this reason, a manager should take the initiative and leadership for designing strategies, which begins by having an entrepreneurial philosophy embodied in its vision and goals. For instance, whether this is a service business, we should implement good sales practices to customers in terms of prices, promotions, services and other additional services, good treatment, and so forth. In the same way, employees should be taken into account because they are engine in an organization. If a manager changes the rules of play, afterwards the problems could present and deteriorate relationships: enterprise and employees, such as occurred at Nordstrom company, which after of being the nation’s leading specialty retailer of apparel, shoes, and accessories, began to diminish its credibility, image, reputation, and; in consequence, its profits. We should take care of our employees and giving a fair treatment. Avoiding the inequality among them, while ones make blue-collar wages others make white-collar wages. Besides, the rules in a company should be objective and transparent; on the contrary, this could generate legal problems. Surely, all of that will undoubtedly trigger in going down an organization’s competitiveness.

On the other context, when a company has ambitious but solid and objective strategies, this is able to reach being competitive on market. Indeed, one of these strategies should be oriented to market niches in which a company can develop its strengths and lead this market. Moreover, another strategy should be oriented to the research and development within an organization- key factor, such as SAS Institute does it by which annually invests more than 30% from its profits. Hence, this software company is considered among the most important software companies worldwide. In like manner, other strategies should be focused on customer in terms of listening them because the services from a company are done for them, as well as engaging them, for example, to require them feedback from employees. This is because the organization will have a better support in its activities. Additionally, another strategy should be the employees. Again, employees are very important in an organization. Often, managers take into account to customers but neglect or prove a little importance to them. This is a crazy error. Workers deserve being treated as such. They should have a good, comfortable, and pleasant work environment, motivation through its different forms circumscribed in the trust and respect towards them, and systematic training. This will allow them having a better labor performance and job satisfaction.

In brief, the decision is in our hands for managing our enterprises. We as managers should not swim against the tide. Nowadays, we are in a globalized, industrialized, and systematized market world where the efficiency, effectiveness, competitiveness, and future insight are key factors; for such, we should be coherent with our decisions and should harmonize and outline better our strategies where main stakeholders, such as customers, employees, suppliers, and enterprises should be take into account. Therefore, our strategies will be attained in so far that our stakeholders are inspired, motivated, trained, compensated, and respected. All of these issues do the management difference.

This is, every manager, should be a leader in their organizations. This in terms of a leader manages to his/her organization to a top position in order to achieve a leadership team. Besides, a leader creates value-added for his/her company as well as enhances the leveraging of strengths and manages weaknesses. In the same way, a leader seeks worker engagement for summing efforts and attaining an organization’s goals.

For that, a manager should not only pursue being assessed within their own organization but also outside, such as Carl Burke did at Specialty Medical Chemical. He knew that had relative successful in his enterprise; nevertheless, he tried to seek a better entrepreneurial position for his company in order to reach a sustainable and competitive growth. In fact, an outside evaluator, allow you prioritizing actions and activities from the assessment of personnel to knowing what aspects you are doing well, what you need to optimize, and what you need to postpone as well.

In truth, outsider inputs will allow us taking advantage the business capabilities as well as improving and/or correcting them. For instance, through the worker feedback in which a manager receives of outsider, this can be better leveraged for increasing their productivity due to often a manager does not take into account real worker potentialities. By the way, in so far that, we integrate individuals and implement strategies based on the suitable entrepreneurial organizational structure we will be able to be capable of having positive, satisfactory, and favorable outcomes for our organizations, which means doing a corporative job focused on the leadership.

In fact, people must be considerate the most prized and important asset for our organizations. Every manager, of course, should be a leader, who should be focused on implementing suitable strategies based on an organization’s vision and mission. Furthermore, these appropriate strategies should particularly also be relied on values, customer services, and employee engagement in order to achieve sustainable competitive advantage through human resources, such as was implemented by Southwest Airlines, in terms of: leadership, recruiting and training, and competitiveness.

In truth, there are a variety of mechanisms for designing strategies ones more effective than others, but the leadership, in my opinion, is the central and main aspect for the success of a company. The leadership should permanently be present in each organization, because through this you can increase the enterprise’s productivity and being more competitive as well. For instance, Southwest Airlines carried out in terms of not only to lower their cost fare but to be also in permanent interaction with their employees and customers. Even more, the Southwest Company is pervaded with meaningful events developed in the cities where Southwest offers its fly services, such as California, in particular in ‘the Garlic Festival’. This particularity, of Southwest Airlines philosophy, does the difference with their competitors.

The leadership would not be attained if our company does not count with the appropriate personal duly selected as well as skilled and trained personal. For that, first of all, a company should design rigorous strategies and criteria in order to recruit them because a Company’s success or failure will rest on people. Therefore, in the measure that we select them the future and success of a firm will be decided. Besides, I consider a vital strategy in the Southwest Airlines involving to customers in expressing their opinions about some applicants. This allows us having a global perception of applicants. In addition, once selected, employees should be permanently trained for being winners, who should also be properly motivated for together attaining the entrepreneurial goals.

Another key point is the competitiveness. This begins with a well-designed organizational structure through a flat administration instead of vertical administration. A flat administration allows to the organization to have a permanent and fluid communication as well as interaction between both structural levels: high position and low position. This fosters a better and productive relationship among employees. Likewise, an entrepreneurial competitive position also depends on the behavior of employees, such as was the case for Southwest pilots, who were identified with Southwest’s culture. All of these strategies are for maximizing the customer satisfaction, for such employees should be engaged to company philosophy.

Successful experiences reached in Southwest Airlines are an example of as companies that let and trust for human resources will definitely have a sustainable and growing success. This is because managers not only are concentrated on identifying and assessing strengths and weaknesses within of their organizations, but also outside of them, of course, always taking into account people in terms of CEOs, employees, customers, and other stakeholders in which must be internalized enterprise’s philosophy in mind, heart, and action.

A change of attitude should be required in our organizations not only for looking for better economic results but also for seeking a satisfaction of client. A proverb prays “the customer always has the reason.” This is because the employees should understand that the bone marrow of the enterprises is the customers. In this regard, the attitude undertaken by Capt. Flanagan has been an example in how improving the image and performance in companies through a positive change of attitude. That’s true that the attitude of Captain has been considered an ‘outlier’; however, this should not be seen of that context rather as a common practice in our employees.

The connection and relationship between employees and customers are vital mainly workers that have a direct contact with them. For instance, if you go a store and you receive a cold, rigid, and unfriendly service, I am absolutely sure that you would have to think two times in going again back on that store. This is for the inappropriate treatment and attitude of worker, which, of course, will finally impact in its company benefits. Treating with clients is a delicate issue because first of all, we do not know behind them what thoughts or problems may have a customer in those circumstances. But, through our positive attitude can become it in a laudable action. All is in our hands!

The employee engagement has been seen as a ‘magic wand’ in which organizations that used it got better outcomes in the productivity of their employees. In truth, the action of engaging workers must be linked to the vision, mission, and specific goals of our organizations and involved to all members of an organization. This is in term of having a coherent and effective engagement of them with the enterprise. Besides, the worker engagement should be understood as a powerful managerial tool, which should be encouraged in all businesspeople as a primary action. For that, managers should implement an agreeable and suitable workplace environment for developing it.

In fact, all employees involve in an enterprise are important in order to reach a better performance. In this instance, an organization should be seen as a wheel and each worker as a cog of it in which each one of them should work well and in one-way to have good performance. An example is described in Gary Latham’s book “Becoming the Evidence-Based manager” in which he specifies that the employee engagement should be implemented to all level. It means one ‘fault’ in one of them will bring negative outcomes for a enterprise for which the bottom line is the multiplication of efforts and not the sum of them. To sum up, the employee engagement is an undeniable measurement, which should be encouraged in our organizations in order to attain more, better, and sustainable performance in our employees.

Regarding to Bob Sutton’s Blog “Work Matters,” first of all, there is a misconception to think that people that are smart they were born with this quality and their Intelligence Quotient (IQ) may not be changed. This is no true because being smart people may fundamentally be achieved for example, through training, perseverance, and hard work. I believe that each of us has been able to be witness about certain people stereotypes in which had a perception, but the outcomes were contrary. Besides, managers that think that the IQ is unchangeable in their employees drive to stagnation in the development their organizations because they are prejudging and undervaluing the employees’ capacity. On the contrary, managers should encourage mechanisms for improving the abilities and skills of their employees; as a result, the performance of them should be increased.

“Can Personality Be Changed?” I think that the personality is also a “malleable” attribute due to the flexible and dynamic of the circumstances. The personality may dramatically be changing in agreement to the environment in which someone is pervaded. Definitely, the environment is a powerful and crucial element in improving or worsening our personality. For instance, whether we have a nice, comfortable, and healthy labor environment, the bottom line will over time be our employees experience and have a positive personality according to the environment in which were surrounded although some of them may have had another personality.

In truth, there are many factors that may affect being smarter o less smart as well as the personality, such as heredity, culture, family, social aspects, and so forth, but these ‘beliefs’ will be improved through tasks “as learning opportunities” and molded according to the scenarios in which the persons are imbued, respectively; so traditional beliefs about that the personality and the IQ may not be undergone are untrue because the personality includes other patterns beyond the habitual behavior.

In agreement with Chris Argyris’s article “Teaching Smart People How to Learn” there is a resistance to change our way of thinking in our organizations in terms of learning and deepening our knowledge for being more productive in our activities. In fact, professionals are concerned on maximizing the production in their operations; nevertheless, they leave postponed basic and structural conditions, such as the values based on a progressive and better learning. They are usually satisfied with developing routine work rather than work focused on continuous improvement, which could substantially have a better performance and, consequently, enhance their benefits. However, the learning is also responsibility not only of professionals but also of the CEOs, who should encourage and motivate to their workers as well as themselves by reaching it.
By the way, the learning should be tied to strategic criteria in which allow to organizations to resign and redirect their goals for having a better performance. This is in the way of feeling, thinking, and doing their activities coherently. In the same way, the traditional human behavior, defensive reasoning, should be overcome by a productive and holistic reasoning, which should, of course, include to all the stakeholders of an organization. Through a frank and open dialogue and work in team would connect better their entrepreneurial goals.
In short, a change of attitude is required in the organizations for being more successful. Regrettably, nowadays, some managers practice the fireman philosophy, which is to put the fire out instead of identifying structural problems, which would allow us giving an effective and real solution to the problems; therefore, we would achieve a better sustainable development in our entire organizations.